Thorin's Thoughts - Every Gun Should Not Be Viable (CS:GO)

Some thoughts on the philosophy of all weapons being viable in CS.

[@xFlRSTx]

must be getting warmer where Thorin lives, hes only wearing 3 jackets now.

[@BamfCross]

ive never heard thooorin say noobs before. This vid was worth watching on that merit alone

[@Thooorin]

BamfCross I don't even just view a noob as someone who is new, I think it also applies to people who remain wilfully ignorant, keeping them in a similar state.

[@IOutsourced]

Thooorin Noob versus Newb. Newb is a new player, Noob is an old player who refuses to change how they play.

[@elapse408]

IOutsourced Ehhhh noob is just how you pronounce newb. Same thing. But it means pretty much both.

[@Gruuv_]

elapse You could pronounce newb in a posh English accent to get knee-yoob.

[@elapse408]

Wong Music I mean.... sure

[@gRime47MX]

I want me one of those semi-automatic machine guns

[@tyluhl]

gRime47MX if you're scream every machine gun is semi automatic

[@M2theAGGOT]

Some Guy Best part about that comment is if anyone asks "Who said that" - we just respond with "Some Guy". Well played sir, well played.

[@superghost6]

M2theAGGOT No one asks who said that on the internet.

[@M2theAGGOT]

superghost6 Have an imagination?

[@swisherrrrrr]

@@M2theAGGOT 6 years late but “source?” “Some Guy”

[@Kutkop345]

that dialog between valve and thooorin at the end XD lmao. Its scary though how close the reality of their mindset probably is, compared to that dialog

[@eXieBoiiTV]

Mr Kees de Koning mr kees.. you too taking a break from posting battlefield videos eh? since bf4 was such a dissapointment to the bf franchise..

[@kimeiga]

yo hook me up with one of those semi automatic machine guns

[@stephenll8469]

When im in university if I take a journalism class, I want Thorin to teach the class.

[@MagicjavaGames]

Isn't it sub machine gun?

[@RockLegend2A]

Yes.

[@Valkyrie_SDS]

Congrats Thooorin for another great video. I was expecting this for a few days and was wondering when it's gonna come out. It finally did and I enjoyed every second of it. Keep it up. It's refreshing to see that there still are people (like yourself) who understand the game.

[@schmeed0000]

"semi-automatic machine guns"? really?

[@Twiggyay]

In an ideal world every gun would be viable, but only in a specific context. The m4 and AK would be the guns that handle every scenario decently. The AUG and SG would be a minor upgrade and would be bought if the economical situation allowed it. The pistols should never ever be a more practical option than the main rifles and would only be used on ecos or in emergency. Shotguns and submachine guns would be a force buy or anti-eco choice. I don't need to define the AWP and autosniper because their roles are very well defined and balanced (except the new movement patch). Everything seems to be in order except for the pistols. I wouldn't want less first bullet accuracy, but spamming shouldn't be as effective as it is now.

[@erica2980]

Twiggyay What about the negrev mate?

[@christianhuang9673]

Marcus Rossi The same as the tazer and the knife: disrespect

[@sixish]

Christian Huang funnily enough the knife has an actual place outside of being disrespectful. It's a high risk high reward and you use it on what would normally be a "free kill" in the back for the chance of getting a lot of money. Sometimes used just because you run out of ammo on pistol with no main gun.

[@DamonHunter13]

Marcus Rossi Never underestimate the psychological torment you can unleash when getting a kill with a heavy machine gun.

[@erica2980]

***** Had a guy walk though smoke at banana and kill 3 people sitting behind the car just holding down the spray on the negrev xD Never heard gamers sound so fucked up

[@RNZplayercs]

Just loved this video. I agree 100% with this way of thinking. Congratulations for this amazing topic/explanation! Sorry about my EN.

[@flandersmanhandles776]

The best thing about CS GO is that you don't have to balance all the guns to each other unlike how the developers want to now. There's a reason the AWP has a $4750 price tag in a competitive match compared to say an AK or an M4. You balance the gun to the economy, or its price, not to other weapons necessarily. An SMG Round 3 should not be as viable as a rifle at all. There are those guns that need balance to their price like say the Tec-9, but not all guns should be made viable in the sense that you have to change the whole meta of the game.

[@mellowmike4183]

2:20 Yes. Semi - Automatic Machine Guns. 10/10 Thorin.

[@troliol]

God damn I love this video. I used to play a game called Day of Defeat competitively and this idea of "updating" the game to cater to casual (read: bad) players was exactly what completely ruined it. They introduced this "cone of fire" concept which basically means "rng" so that any gun would have some degree of randomness regardless of how accurately you could aim it. It creates this effect where you can have a rifle, laser beam accuracy, godlike reaction time, and just miss because of a dice roll, and at the same time, some scrub who doesn't have a clue what he's doing can run around a corner spraying an smg, survive your shot based on randomly assigned accuracy, and land a headshot while aiming 3 feet to your left based on the exact same cone of fire principle. I feel like this is an incredibly common issue in game balancing, and I think most game designers don't understand the value of a strong competitive scene. How did games like Quake and CS get so popular and successful to begin with? Why are they still being played DECADES after their release? Exactly because there is this skill ceiling that allows for a dynamic competitive scene. The games get longevity and popularity on the back of a strong competitive scene which exists because of the skill ceiling, this popularity brings in bad players who want to be rewarded instantly with no effort, so the devs lower the skill ceiling and destroy the competitive element that sustained the game in the first place. It happens so frequently I almost feel like they're making good games by accident and then working to destroy them when the game succeeds in spite of their lack of understanding of game balance.

[@sed4512]

The old style of games did not have RNG, some devs use it to balance things.

[@RockLegend2A]

You seem to forget that CS:GO also has a cone of fire, but it's based around their spray pattern mechanics, not just "bullets go in this general circle, and then up a little because of recoil". That's what Gmod does. Meanwhile, TF2 doesn't even have recoil.

[@troliol]

CS's cone of fire is nothing like DoD's. Rilfes will hit where you aim them as long as you're standing still. Cone of fire is used intelligently to lower the accuracy of certain guns in CS, in DoD it was basically just a global element of randomness that catered to bad players. Cone of fire isn't necessarily awful, it depends on how it's implemented.

[@Alnilamlol]

Thorin i prolong my showers just so i can listen to the whole eargasm while showering , beautiful m8.

[@lukejackson1121]

The P90 is a great example of an SMG that is price balanced with the rifles. However easy it may be to use at lower skill levels, however annoying it may be to die to it at any skill level, it is priced a bit lower than a rifle - exactly where it should be.

[@N4N0_21]

Now I'm just a player. I'm not pro, I'm not an analyst, I'm just a player on esea. But what if these changes were made: 1) All pistols (barring the deagle) will do ~60 damage or less with a headshot against opponents with helmets. 2) The 5-7 and Tec-9 have 15 bullets per clip (this allows them to still be a bit better than the P250 so the higher cost is viable) 3) All pistols moving accuracy is reduced. (This forces less luck shots 4) The SMGs have an easier spray pattern (this will give the usefulness because of their high fire-rate and tagging abilities) 5) The SMGs are extremely inaccurate while moving (this will get rid of "run and gun" and will make it important to stand still for the gun to be affective) 6) the AWP nerf be done away with (this was stupid and counterproductive to begin with) There are many more changes I would make to the game, but these are probably the 6 most important in my personal opinion.

[@themodfather9382]

Dyelon210 Most important point is pistol damage. Not accuracy, not SMGs, but pistol damage

[@thomasb2354]

Dyelon210 Agree with everything but 3 and 5. Reducing moving accuracy forces MORE lucky shots, not less. Less accuracy = more luck with hitting. SMGs SHOULD be accurate while moving, that's should be the power of SMG/Pistols, but their dmg needs to be nerfed (esp pistols). Also aimpunch needs to be removed and first shot accuracy on rifles increased.

[@Thooorin]

Dyelon210 I think some of your changes are steps in the right direction. I don't know if the pistols have to be that weakened, but I'd like to see it tried in practice to know. I think 5) might be a bit too extreme, maybe just nerf accuracy a little. Anyway, I think you have a better coherent philosophy on balance than Valve has displayed.

[@Advegsu]

Dyelon210 agreed, generally all that run and gun shit should be eliminated all together, because only thing it does is promote less skilled, more random and luck oriented plays.

[@CptShiba]

Dyelon210 for 1), i think the deagle is in a good spot and doesn't need a damage nerf (or a nerf in general). for 2), im not sure about the 2 bullets = $200 (of course there are some other advantages, but still). 3), 4), and 6) i agree with, and 5) i dont think they should be extremely inaccurate, just a bit more inaccurate then they are now.

[@AROMANNNNNN]

I would love to see a video where you break down your thoughts about the differences and similarities between esports and "real" sports. Specifically topics such as skill/skill ceiling, training, game philosophy and competitive mentalities.

[@garantes9257]

"the aug, and the other gun" poor SG, I really like tap firing with it

[@RockLegend2A]

The SG is an amazing, statistically superior weapon that people throw aside because of the AK's popularity and preconceptions about scopes and the playstyle they supposedly form. I love the SG in general. Not only is it better than the AK in stats, but it also looks better, and I appreciate a good aesthetic.

[@Tornf4lk]

+RockLegend2 it comes down to preference though. I'd gladly save 300 dollars for a smoke or an HE when the AK can already oneshot people.

[@RockLegend2A]

dawniii True, which is why 3kliksphilip refers to the SG as a weapon you use to cement your lead when you're winning a match. Upgrade from the AK when you have the money and use the SG to keep the winning streak on. It works.

[@Tornf4lk]

+RockLegend2 I've done this once or twice for sure. Though the majority of times I actually get an SG is if I'll be holding a long angle but still may want a proper assault rifle when entering a site. I lurk for my team and will use it to scope down B main in cache if my team is taking A for example. But if I'm not in a super specific situation, the AK is better for me simply because of the amount of training I've done with it...

[@quixotes4478]

this hits different post 2019...

[@Crowbar]

This was a great game-design lesson.

[@kevinbrennan117]

I love how you talk about CS. Its inspiring. Agree with everything you say here

[@johnnavrozidis]

The SMGs start to becoming Overpowered not Only Versus Eco Rounds but Mainly vs Riflers ... the ability to Run and Gun while you have High Fire Rate is so OP . I totally agree with Thorin , Valve should do something about this ... CS : GO is start becoming like CoD and BF .

[@doubled6490]

Dopa 大斗之 SMG OP? SMG cannot be used long range better than rifles. SMG:s idea is to be best at close range.

[@johnnavrozidis]

Flusha was the first one who started abusing UMP really early in the game... In an interview he said that more people will start doing this once they realize how strong it is

[@GuilhermeHenrique-ve7xv]

Is it just me or thorin went out on the sun wearing a rayban sunglasses and then came here to record this vid

[@a9gro]

32:17 Awesome mindset to have as a player in general.

[@SergeiTheAnarch]

If CS had my design philosophy, it would be this: there is a time and place to use each gun.

[@adhurimsheji9337]

Mister Bearpunch If CS had my design philosophy, there would not be a CSGO to this date only 1.6

[@delatroy]

Excellent analysis Thorin.

[@vvvortic]

who cares, caller of dotter takes no mechonics compared to legend of leaguer where i deserve challenjour but sadly has bronzil elo hell, gg

[@snasuage]

vvvortic xd memesss

[@hackzein4138]

vvvortic these are getting worse..

[@DrzymalaWagon]

38:59 for skipperino the Thorino

[@ZpLitgaming]

***** Why?

[@Figurefi]

***** u basic fucktard csgo kid. gtfo

[@pkermen]

Fuski [phone] if u get bored by thoorin you're most likely a braindead 12 yr old laughing at pics from 9gag

[@ilponho]

kidzilla man amen

[@MTLA1984]

seems like valve want to make all guns VIABLE for sale on the market

[@SonGoku-yq7cm]

Loved it Thorin. The community needs your voice to revolt against valves tyranny. THUNDERB3AST

[@lawless430]

Finally a reputable person sharing my thoughts as well, thank you! I think its based off the meta like in other Esports such as Dota 2, what may be viable this year may not be next year and can vary patch to patch but just because how CS:GO works, it is hard to make a weapon costing $1000 justifiably better than one costing $3000.

[@AgiDaKinG]

The thing that made CS so fun for me is because it was hard to be good at, that's what makes being good at the game so satisfying. But when you simplify everything to cater to newer players it takes the funnest part of the game away and ultimately ruins the experience for the better players.

[@s1bulka]

Not wearing a jacket, seems like spring is finally there.

[@danielkruyt8192]

There is a case to be made about seemingly 'unreasonable' adjustments to weapon costs/stats every now-and-again: it provides data that can be used to further understand, and hence improve, the game. Granted, what is done now with the statistic-based alterations does not actually provide the data I'm talking about (that, or Valve isn't using it), but it can. Upsetting balances allows you to further explore the game's behaviour- and choice-spaces. Game theory tells us there exist multiple 'balances' with a given set of rules, and they are worth attempting to investigate IMO.

[@inertlife]

Thorin you are so damn right. What happens with modern games is potential users and profits tend to trump skill-based gameplay. One example would be World of Warcraft. In the original version leveling was difficult and getting great loot was very rewarding. As the game went on the game became easier and easier to appeal to more potential users and in turn removed all difficulty and reward from the game. The same appears to be happening in CS with the gun changes... and in a way it was a matter of time before Valve realized that making the game noob friendly would increase the amount of copies sold and interest in the game overall. The sad reality is that when the game gets to the point where it turns into a watered down example like WoW, the hardcore players will have to move on to a game that is actually rewarding.

[@Hubris1998]

if tagging was changed so it depends on wich gun you are being shot with and not wich gun are you carrying wouldnt that solve almost every problem?

[@CrystalCNXN]

It was meant for that

[@jiaweikoh]

Thooorin Please Thooorin, I'm a huge fan and would love you to make some podcast instead of just videos so that I can download them and listen to ! Love your videos keep it up :) Like an MP3 form or something

[@RitwikSharma]

Man I was waiting for thoorin to get super angry like at the end of the awp nerf video. Didn't happen. Pity. Anyway nice to hear your views as always thoorin.

[@KarlTheCool]

Did he get like aviator shaped sun burns?

[@AlertYT]

in case you havent seen it yet watch warowl's video on run and gun. Almost made my eyes bleed when the spray control is easier to control at full spring than it is a standing still :(

[@Niviuz]

this is like hearing your old uncle talking about politics for an hour but csgo.

[@patdan10]

I think that every gun should be viable in that there should be a time and place where each gun is the best one to buy at that moment. Even if it's only in very specific situations, no gun should never be the best option.

[@ethanb5533]

I feel the exact same way

[@Rodhizzzle]

That quake story was amazing!

[@RNZplayercs]

This is probably the best explanation ever to a couple of problems I always say abou CSGO. Its a mirror of my thoughts about the game. I played competitive cs 16 and competitive csgo, i have more than 5000 hours on both games and i always said that cs 1.6 is the most skilled required of all the CS versions and this video explains some of the reasons why. Thank you @thooorin

[@0dWHOHWb0]

Semi-auto machine gun? What, the Tec9?

[@twertas]

Hey Thorin, I see you talk a lot about quake and how high skill-capped it is so I'm just curious if you are familiar with a game's called Tribes competitive scene?

[@EvsEntps]

The way CS:GO should be: - Everyone weapon has a consistent recoil pattern with no random spread every time it is fired. - Different guns should have different complexities of recoil pattern based on cost/damage/fire rate. (tec9s and SMGs should have a super hard recoil pattern) - The skill is in how good you are at learning the consistent recoil of each gun and calibrating your spray pattern in real-time to fit the enemy's movement. - Random spread should only apply when moving. - Every kill should give the same money reward.

[@BodhiGeraci]

EvanEnterprises You're an idiot, you have any idea why the spray patterns are random but then not really? So you can pull down to compensate for the recoil with your fucking hand instead of having a fixed recoil that is always the same that can be scripted, people would be able to fire 30 shots of an AK with 100% accuracy into someones head with a firing script......

[@EvsEntps]

Bodhi GeraciThat doesn't make any sense. Any recoil script that alters CS GO's memory would constitute hacking and would result in a VAC ban. If you're talking about mouse macros, yes, random spread may reduce the effectiveness of a mouse macro, but not any more than reducing player's skill ceiling, which is a completely wrong approach in a competitive game. Besides, if spray macros were viable pros would use them now as much as in the no random spread world. There's a reason people don't bother with recoil macros and that's because they only work properly when you're shooting at a stationary target. Try moving your mouse whilst doing a spray macro and it will disproportionately affect the spray pattern at different stages of the macro. E.g. if macro is moving leftwards at some part of the spray and you want to move your crosshair rightwards at a moving target, the two will counteract each other and your crosshair will stay put until another part of the spray. You would have to move your mouse rightwards at 2x the velocity of the macro in order to achieve moving your crosshair right during the spray. In effect you'd still have to learn a recoil pattern, it would just be your own weird version of recoil that your macro has resulted in distorting. It would indeed be overpowered if you could separate the spray macro from your independent crosshair movement but that would probably involve altering the game's memory while it runs in order to distinguish the two mouse movements. As said previously this is a moot point because you would get VAC banned for doing this.

[@duhLukie]

god you are allways right,in every fucking video. Valve should srsly hire thorin and be the boss of csgo.

[@lewisbirkett4428]

It's not just them being viable, it's ease of use, it makes it easier for newer players to get kills and more accessible for bad players to start

[@VolcanoShed]

+Lewis Birkett The point of Counter-Strike is to have a high skill ceiling, which is why it's very appealing to some players over say, Call of Duty. (Not to say that Call of Duty doesn't have a high skill ceiling, just not as high.) If they were to add it, it should be in the form of a new game mode, separate from the competitive community. If all else fails, there's always Source for a more marxist skill distribution.

[@lewisbirkett4428]

VolcanoShed I know that but valve are wanting more people to play so making it easier

[@LasGraffitas]

Exactly my thoughts. I suggest make smg's cost more and pistols too. Great video Thorin.

[@erichuckenpahler3888]

I'd like to see more skill based weapons at the lower end of cost for weapons. Guns like the deagle, scout, and P250 that reward good aim, but would never be considered better than a rifle. For example, give the nova a bit more range, but increase the cost and the delay between shots slightly. Or maybe even at the higher end, a new semi-automatic rifle that rewarded careful tap shooting at long range over the AK/Colt, but was very hard to use at closer ranges (something between the rifles and the AWP). These high powered, low skill weapons like the Tec9 and some SMG's are absurd. Cost efficiency is key, as Thorin said.

[@djchange]

This episode of "Thorin's Thoughts" is sponsored by Rockstar Energy Drink. -- Thorin is not liable or responsible in any way that Rockstar Energy Drink will make an impact on your daily life from this day forward. Neither in an economical or social aspect.

[@jazzzonyourface]

I agree, but another issue to look at is mid air accuracy. Jumping around corners and firing should not be a valid tactic but when you see it at the pro level in teams like envyus, its ridiculous

[@MusicFan20101]

love the videos thooorin! keep it up!

[@sm-xc6fn]

amazing outro as always.

[@bashthebashmanbasham]

SMG = Submachine Gun traditionally defined as automatic fire arms that use pistol ammo. Semi-automatic means you have to pull the trigger once for each bullet to be discharged. Quick scoping is where you click mouse 2 then mouse 1 in rapid succession where you see the scope for an instant to get the accuracy from being in scope (in CS counter-strafing or braking is combined with this to be accurate). No scoping is where you press mouse 1 only and no scope is used.

[@bashthebashmanbasham]

it was more of an impulse comment when he didn't break out SMG correctly and he confused the meaning of quick scope/no scope twice so I just decided to add it on. Didn't expect it to be noticed.

[@markdotinc8371]

I wonder if they could have dynamic pricing for guns, like a real market and let the players determine the value of guns based on demand

[@xTonyxis]

I'm definitely one of the people saying every gun should be viable. But they way you put it is completely alien to me. Every champ in league should be viable, but within their role, and the same applies to guns in CS

[@Hlmg-hw6om]

i agree sooo much! there are so few people who actually phrase this points in this way. even on the subreddit noone complained about the mobility disadvantages of the rifles and snipers. i dont think valve will do it but i want to go back to p250-eco and rifle times ;)

[@kungensimon]

"All the dog shit that all the fucking noobs wants" Preach brother, Throorin for Pope of esports

[@Mixa_Lv]

Gun viability is simply the purpose that the gun has. It doesn't mean that the weapon would be all-around good, just that it has its own specific role in the game. If the role is missing or it's greatly overlapping with some other weapon, one of those weapons will lose its viability.

[@ekkyayo]

The 1.6 SMG's were perfectly balanced. The mac10, ump all required a ton of direct hits to the head(with head armor) in order to land a kill, hard but not impossible. yet the mp5 would be slightly better but still would require you to outplay/skill ur opponent wielding a rifle. Heck, the half buys in 1.6 were dropp 2 ak's, those two players buys helmet and a set of nades, aswell as drop a deagle to those who supplied the ak's. so they still had a weapon that _Potentially_ could favor them by out skilling / out playing the opponent. Now how ever you just buy every round, the factor between risk/reward is so immensely close that there's no reason why you shouldn't buy, the smg's/pistols are so powerful that like Thoorin said, it can even out perform a rifle in situations where it shouldn't. Not to mention, in what Galaxy does it make sense that a 1500$ buy should have the same if not just slightly lower of a chance to win compared to the guy who just sunk in 4000+ for a bloody rifle. Sure if those 1500$ are spent on a deagle+kevlar, i'll respect that player for killing the rifler, anything else how ever...

[@billygowhoop]

2:17 I personally love a good semi-automatic machine gun.

[@lukejackson1121]

Semi-automatic machine guns?

[@DarkTrooper910]

Thorin, Valve should just hire you for the development and balance of CS:GO. Obviously they have no idea how to do this, evident with their updates. You have a lot of knowledge and understanding of the balance needed in CS, considering how much experience you have. I hope they will listen to your videos and take your advice.

[@goldi12323]

What would happen if we all always buy bizon and duals. Would they nerf them only because the numbers? D:

[@hegelian.breakcore]

I love Thorins voice, it is gravily, heavy, and talking about a subject I like, I could jizz in my pants!

[@Frikgeek]

Problems with accuracy on the first bullet? You mean how the AK has kinda shit first shot accuracy compared to the M4 or the SG553? Why does the AK have to be "the best" weapon at all ranges? Ts should be a bit worse off with accuracy on their super cost efficient 1hit headshot rifle compared to the CTs. If you want accurate 1st shot headshots just buy the SG553, it's as good as an m4 even if you don't scope and it retains the AK47 1hit headshots. Just forget that the scope even exists because seriously, it just takes away your awareness and makes you run slower for a bit more 1st shot accuracy that's only useful if you're doing something crazy like trying to kill an AWPer with a rifle in cobblestone. I know the AK47 has been super accurate on its 1st shot in 1.6 and source but I really don't see a reason to keep it that way. I guess you could say that CSGO is already CT sided so why not buff the terrorist guns, but why not just make SG553/AK47 a loadout choice and make them cost the same. The SG553 is harder to spray moving targets with because the spray is diagonal on its first 15 bullets(unlike the straight down AK47), but it's deadly accurate when tapping. The SG553/AK47 choice is similar to the M4A4/M4A1 choice, it would just have to be balanced to the point where both weapons are appealing. Or are you talking about netcode or hitreg issues that make the bullets miss and not the built-in inaccuracy of the guns? The CSGO balance on the whole is fucked up though. The fact that you can kill people with a cheap cost-efficient weapon when they have the best gun money can buy is ridiculous. That's like killing someone who has a completed Infinity Edge when you only have a brutalizer, you better have made some ridiculous inhuman super outplay for that.

[@Frikgeek]

***** Yeah, no shit. I've already said that.

[@blacktimhoward4322]

Wrong

[@technomunk]

If you have a hierarchy of "op" things it doesn't actually mean that those things are overpowered, perhaps it means that the thing you're comparing everything to is underpowered.

[@jesslin2346]

You should change it to "Not every game should be viable" Every gun should not be viable can be interpreted as no gun should be viable.

[@simivb]

I think you misinterpreted the story you told completly: He did not say, that he should compete with people who played it for years; He said, that he was disapointed, that the people in his game were not people he could compete with. You immideatly assumed, that he meant that he wants to be as good as the best, when all he was saying was that he played with the wrong people. Put him in a game with other noobs, and he will have a blast. This was a matchmaking issue not a balance issue. I think the best example for this is Rocketleague: You have immediate fun when you play it, because you have exciting matches. Because there are other people with your skillevel. You can be bored, if you play against pros, because they will always win, and you don't stand a chance. Never. But this obviously can't be a balance issue, because everyone has the same odds in Rocketleague. I also think, that you can't say that he is the wrong kind of guy for the game. If you were put in a ring with Muhammed Ali and have never boxed before, you probably won't be to exicited for a new round after getting knocked out. Now is this because you are not the guy for boxing? Certainly not. It is because no one would want to learn boxing when he can only have his first accomplishments when he is world class. If there are only world class players, then you won't have fun, until you can beat them. Do you really expect him to get beaten every time, until he has put as much time in quake, as all the other people? And i think that this is the core problem: Quake is an old game, that has no middle class players. There is the elite, and the rest dropped out years ago. To get new players, you have to have a playerbase, that covers all the skill levels, because otherwise there is no ladder for people to climb up. There is either worldclass or bullshit, so you won't have fun on your way up, because you are alone in between. If you want somebody to like climbing, you don't take him on a tour up a 4000m mountain. You show him the starter courses. Sorry 4 bad english.

[@DeathLoney]

Thorin, I want to mention CS:GO has one good example of weapon balance. The P90 is $2350, Famas $2250 and Galil is $2000, but this makes sense because the P90 is better than both those guns lol.

[@job187]

Thooorin for CS president, please. Seriously though, the points he's making is so self evident that I'm amazed that they even have to be expressed. Most games goes to shit when they pander to the incompetent masses.

[@Drazicist]

Valve changes the specs on guns to keep the meta fresh, nothing more. Anyone who thinks the way you make a game exciting is by getting the balance 100% right is so out of touch with how business interests cross over with game mechanics it isn't funny. There is no such thing as balance, it is a myth, the balance of CS or any Esports is that it is imbalanced. The imbalance is what makes the game great.

[@Drazicist]

***** I've been playing CS since it was a mod mate, go play a perfectly balanced game and tell me how awesome it is after a couple of months once all the strats and guns have been mastered and you can't change anything without fucking up that balance. Never been a perfectly balanced game in the history of games.

[@00HoODBoy]

Mn8 i for some reason dont agree on your first comment but i do agree on your second?

[@Drazicist]

00HoODBoy Beauty of life isn't it. Everyone has their own opinion but only those in a position of power matter.

[@00HoODBoy]

Mn8 very well said. im just confused about myself because you were backing up your point( i disagree on) with an argument thats valid for me (~ i agree on).interesting topic nonetheless

[@CaptainKeytie00]

In a casual game that is totally right, but we play cs because we want to train the same thing thousands of hrs and get better in it. We want to make the differences by new tactics with new smokes and stuff and not by op pistols...

[@OfirShen]

I think you meant "Not every gun should be viable"

[@HyPeRQsZzZRaymond]

So im on cs while listening to this and it tells me to update my client, my hopes were so high i thought everything was getting fixed, no turns out just a new case :(

[@WildflowerGG]

So if equally skilled players are fighting and the ones buying these eco weapons are winning rounds that they theoretically (at least in 1.6 logic) should be losing, what does that mean for the overall meta/ the competitive scene? Is making the skill cap lower the same thing as making an equally skilled player with an eco buy have a better chance to win? Will this mean that pro games are closer and there will be less blowouts? I just kinda wanna envision the consequences of having more "op" weapons. It isn't like COD where you can spawn with a .50 cal sniper rifle every time you get killed just yet but its getting closer.

[@joeybonzo347]

Thorin kinda sounds like thawing depending on how you say it. Have you finally turned on the heat?

[@chrisfantasm3542]

if you look closely, the area around the eyes are brighter than the rest of his face

[@JonLeinbach]

semi-automatic machine guns /10

[@Munchables]

"Every gun should not be viable" another way to word that would be "no guns should be viable". Swap the Not the the front of the title and it makes sense :)

[@CaretaTheSwedishBro]

Run and gun with Mac-10 and MP9 worked fine (in Master gaurdian ranks) pre-patch but we were just very few players who used this practice and it could be damn effective depending on your position and map (Facade MP9 rush offices FTW) and because it was such an unconventional tactic.

[@djbrissette]

CaretaTheSwedishBro any strat is unconventional on Facade since it's only played by low-rankers, nobody at even the semi-pro level would even consider playing that map, I did twice and it was horrible.

[@CaretaTheSwedishBro]

dB mirage Mac-10. Dust2 MP9 on short or rushing lower dark. etc

[@zamboz01]

the dream for cs1.6 is real with this dude.... I think the game is decent and should not be patched for pro player but for the general public

[@kstxevolution9642]

SMG stands for submachine gun, thorin. Love your videos

[@sebthefalcon]

He probably knows that, just a slip-up!

[@Woodenwakka]

I think what people mean is that every gun should be viable to their price, the ak-47 should be WORTH $2700 because you can usually get a kill with or. The Five-SeveN should be worth $500 because you can at least do damage or, if you're lucky, get a kill.

[@skyydott]

I agree with this statement but I'd like to add my own "changes" to weapons. We can agree that the P250 is worth the price because it has less damage than most pistols but is still better than the starters and only has 3 magazines which means the bullets you do shoot have to be effective or at least deliberate. However, at close range it is a one-shot headshot against fully-armoured opponents. Therefore, should every weapon that costs more than $300 be a one-shot headshot (effectively all of them except starters) against head armour? Why isn't my M4A1-S/M4A4 a one-shot headshot at close range when I'm paying almost 11x the money for it? Better yet, why is the AK-47 a one-shot headshot when my M4 isn't? Why does the AK-47 possess the capability to one-shot helmeted opponents at ANY range? In regard to that, I propose that the M4's should be as effective, if not more so, than the AK-47 because I'm paying more for it. Also in regard to that, I propose that all pistols (excluding the Desert Eagle) should NOT be one-shot headshot weapons at ANY and all ranges versing armoured opponents, because otherwise they're worth more than the money you pay for them. In conclusion, the weapons in CS:GO as they are, are not worth the money you pay for them and likewise some are worth more than the money you pay for them. For CS:GO to flourish as a well thought-out and balanced competitive shooter there are core mechanics that NEED to be altered, chief of which is the pricing on all the weapons so that you are paying exactly what you're getting. The problem immediately following that is the damage output these weapons are capable of for the price they are. If Valve can address, fix, and stabilise those two things then CS:GO will finally be taking positive steps towards being the best competitive shooter.

[@Kipani_]

Preach it!!!!

[@Bosstrad]

it would be good for the 57 + t9 to receive another slight nerf and have the smg buff reverted.

[@bluewker]

Thorin! I agree with 99% of your points. There is one point that I feel you did not define clearly - the value of a weapon. To say that a Rifle should always win against an SMG sounds wrong to me. The win %ge should typically favor the rifle, but not always. It depends on how you define a weapon's value. A weapon can be defined by a large number of characteristics, but two main ones are damage and accuracy over a variety of ranges. An SMG should only be good up to low-medium range. A rifle has more flexibility. In 1.6, only Rifles (and deagle) could wall bang. SMGs can barely wall-bang in CS GO. I could go on, but I think my tl;dr is this: Just because a weapon is more expensive, does not mean it should always win all circumstances. More expensive often seems to mean more flexible in CS. In quake, there is a definitive weapon hierarchy that is simple to understand. In CS, the hierarchy/effectiveness of weapons is altered by the maps (positions to hold, ranges to engage at) and the ability of a weapon to handle these different situations makes them much more valuable. I guess what I'm saying is...a weapon's value isn't just its . A rifle is still a great general weapon, but to say that you should always win rifle vs SMG in medium range is a tough one. The side that's packing SMGs (or sMG/rifle) is automatically discouraged from attacking areas where long distances are involved, which gives a tactical advantage to the defending team by being able to predict enemy movements better. Am I wrong? I really don't want to sound ignorant and I feel like I'm just nitpicking one of your points but I figured it'd be worth my shot at explaining my view.

[@blazeku]

P.S. Viability is, for me, state in which you can imagine situation where gun is a right choice. Simple as that. In 1.3 you could do that with awp ak colt and deagle (not counting usp and glock). People want some other guns see ANY play. Situation where some other guns are one of the choices.

[@HeyImBrim]

I really like this video Thooorin The point of those broken buys is gambling to keep your team in the game. An equivalent to going all in on a hand in texas hold-em. You're trying to keep yourself afloat in a situation where you are at a clear disadvantage. At this point in the csgo meta, "going all in" on a half buy is like having a pair of Kings or Queens in your hand every time. Sure, there's one or two other hands that can beat you, but in reality, you have just as good of a chance to win as your opponent, and that's not real gambling.

[@Dasmaster1]

I would say it like this: Every gun is a tool with which you can approach a situation. Every tool should be viable and produce a result. They do not have to be equal, they do not have to be used equally or at all but there should be a point to every single weapon and it should fit inside the economy of a competitive match.

[@Askooin]

If everything is OP. Nothing is OP

[@rig238]

+Ask Bjørndal Øines He's a good player already.

[@rmvpbnq]

+Patrick O. sigh..

[@briancarruthers3261]

I don't always use sub machine guns but when i do they are semi-auto machine guns

[@Darkie007]

Hierarchy should be as follows: Snipers - All range Rifles - All range SMGS - Close to medium - high rate of fire but low damage Shotguns - Close range but very high damage Pistols - Close range - Very cheap but low damage except for Deagle Balancing would also be done by the range modifier in that weapons that are close range would do low damage to medium range and very low damage to far range

[@JSHADOWM]

***** a real life shotgun is DEADLY accurate within 25 meters, and kills an unarmored human at 50 meters, any further than that and inconcistency starts coming in. You know whats 25 meters? The ramp of suicide.

[@kepp12]

the tapping has been modified but its still not yet fixed. the 2-3 tap bursts in 1.6 were so nice. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mIisiqKfja-AqJY kzbin.info/www/bejne/mIisiqKfja-AqJY i love that part so much.

[@InternetMoneyPE]

I agree that cz's shouldnt be raping ak47s. However I do think more guns should be viable. You basically said its okay if shotguns are never used or smgs are never used and I disagree. However, smgs should cost more. an mp9 shouldnt be fucking a colt if it costs 1/3

[@InternetMoneyPE]

lol facts

[@sweatygenius]

Fully agree with him but did he seriously say that SMG stands for Semi Machine Guns? .-.

[@DarylVincent23]

that moment that cod4 promod has a better gun hierarchy than CS:GO

[@THEWILLY417]

I think that the problem lies in the entire gaming industry. Developers want more money, to make more money, you need to sell the game to more people, to cater to more people you need to make the game more "accessible" by either making it easier to play or maybe worse compromising the artistic value of the game because some SJW on twitter thinks it offends someone. Also how many launches of so called AAA titles have been without bugs, poor optimalisation etc. Game developers want more money yet they do half of their job and I think that's the main problem with games that come out these days and that of course translates into esports as well.